You're Fake News!... No, You're Fake News!
Do we really live in a post truth world? The answer is both yes and no. The danger with this concept is that it is a double edged sword. Have a look around the internet and you will now find many people using the term 'fake news' to defend increasingly polarized view points and political stances.
I see this BS on Facebook day in, day out...
"You're fake news!"
"No, you're fake news!"
and so the shit flinging continues, with few actually finding any truth rooted in facts.
Post-truth differs from traditional contesting and falsifying of facts by relegating facts and expert opinions to be of secondary importance relative to appeal to emotion. While this has been described as a contemporary problem, some observers have described it as a long-standing part of political life that was less notable before the advent of the Internet and related social changes.
This is an important point and it gets to the heart of the issue. The concept of post-truth (or fake news) isn't a new one, it's the delivery method and efficacy that have changed.
Fake news Propaganda is an age old method of influencing decisions.
The first systematic attempt to use and analyze propaganda was in ancient Greece. The use of deliberate forms of speech carefully calculated to deliver a persuasive message can also be found in the writings of Confucius in his Analects.
However, since the advent of the internet everyone can be reached by, or engage in, propaganda. And this is where the 'no' part of my answer comes in, we're not living in a post truth world because there are ways to limit the influence propaganda has in your life by focusing on verifiable facts.
People choose to live in a post truth world or not.
People choose to only engage in politics on an emotional level, and in many cases, people are just too lazy to do the research.
Finding Facts in a Sea of Lies
It is a case of focus and research. The simpler I keep my methodology, the easier it is to remove the influence of opinion in my voting decisions.
This article might be meaningless to 90% of steemians, as it describes my methodology in assessing all the political parties in the run up to the UK general election. The general election is happening on the 12th of December and had been, supposedly, called by the current prime minister to end the Brexit deadlock.
But even if you're not from the UK, read on. I think my method of assessment can be applied universally in most countries. The only problem is that in researching your favored politicians you may become pretty depressed looking at their voting record and how many times they've gone back on what they've said 🤣
My Political Methodology
It's super simple.
Check voting records (see image above) - very important as it will show who are 'career politicians' (willing to vote against their own stated morals for political gain) and who stick mainly to their moral stance trying to better society in the way they believe is best.
Look at what the potential leader and the potential frontbenchers of each party have done (their actions) in their past.
Look at each parties policies.
And vote accordingly based on FACTS. Everything else is just noise.
Cutting Through Propaganda
If you're making voting choices based on what you read in the newspapers (or on the internet), or even what you see represented on television news sources, you're not voting based on an impartial reflection of the facts. Editors are beholden to managing directors, and they very often have their own political agenda. Beyond that, there is a bias in the fact that editors/producers are always looking to sell papers or chase ratings respectively. It's very hard to get to the truth when you're consuming other people's opinions on a daily basis. People are biased, by our psychological make up we lie to ourselves on a regular basis, which means many will lie, or spin the truth, when it comes to the emotionally charged realm of politics.
Politicians are always going to capitulate on things they've said, this is the nature of democratic governance.
To measure their effectiveness it is essential to assess them all on how much they get done that is aligned to their core values as stated in policy and manifesto.
To try and predict this is a difficult thing, judging the integrity of a group of people with power is like throwing a paper airplane in a hurricane; confusing and pointless. At least a portion of them will be in it for themselves. It's for this reason that I research the potential leader in a general election, because it is their leadership that will hold the party members to account.
My political method may be simplistic, but it separates facts intentions and behaviors clearly, allowing for an informed decision beyond propaganda.
I've always identified as an anarchist, and I still do believe that all systems of government tried to date have failed in facilitating social evolution in the most effective way. The state of our dying planet proves this fact for me. The proliferation of poverty and separatist ideology throughout the world proves this fact for me. But I will vote when I see a chance at an option that aligns closer to the compassionate society I would like to see in the future. Based on my method, the choice is clear for me on how to vote in this upcoming election.